HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005-05-24 City Council Summary Minutes
Special Meeting
May 24, 2005
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS ........................................................................138
1. Ordinance Approving a Development Agreement with Stanford University including the Mayfield Lease for the Stanford/Palo Alto
Community Playing Fields (1st Reading 05/02/2005, Passed 5-1, Kishimoto no, Cordell,
Freeman, Mossar not participating) ...................................................................138
Ordinance Amending the Zoning Code and Map in Order to Implement
the Development Agreement and Related Ground Lease (1st Reading
05/02/2005, Passed 5-1, Kishimoto no, Cordell, Freeman, Mossar not participating) .....................138
ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m. .................................148
05/24/05 99-137
The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Council
Chambers Room at 6:00 p.m.
PRESENT: Beecham, Burch, Cordell, Kishimoto, Kleinberg, Morton (arrived
at 6:05 p.m.), Ojakian
ABSENT: Freeman, Mossar
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
None.
CONSENT CALENDAR
LEGISLATIVE
1. Ordinance Approving a Development Agreement with Stanford
University including the Mayfield Lease for the Stanford/Palo Alto
Community Playing Fields (1st Reading 05/02/2005, Passed 5-1, Kishimoto no, Cordell,
Freeman, Mossar not participating)
Ordinance Amending the Zoning Code and Map in Order to Implement
the Development Agreement and Related Ground Lease (1st Reading
05/02/2005, Passed 5-1, Kishimoto no, Cordell, Freeman, Mossar not participating)
Council Member Freeman would not participate in the item due to a conflict
of interest because of Government Code Section 1090, as she was employed
as a substitute teacher with the Palo Alto Unified School District (PAUSD).
Council Member Mossar would not participate in the item due to a conflict of
interest because her husband was employed by Stanford University.
Council Member Cordell stated she would not participate in the item due to a
conflict of interest because she was employed by Stanford University.
City Manager Frank Benest said based on Stanford University’s Offer Letter
of June 2003, the City Council authorized the City Manager, City Attorney,
and City staff to negotiate the Stanford Development Agreement. On May 2,
2005, the City Council held a public hearing on the matter, certified the
Environmental Impact Report (EIR), and approved the first reading of the Ordinance approving a Development Agreement based on public testimony
regarding community benefits and the positive recommendations from three
City commissions. Subsequent to the public hearing, the City received
complaints from the Town of Los Altos Hills and some of its residents
alleging inadequate notice. At the City Council meeting of May 16, 2005,
staff reviewed the chronology of notices and the contact between the City of
05/24/05 99-138
Palo Alto and the Town of Los Altos Hills. In December 2004, the Town of
Los Altos Hills received a detailed notice on the Draft EIR. The notice was
also published as a display ad in the Palo Alto Weekly, which was mailed to
Los Altos Hills households served by the Palo Alto Unified School District
(PAUSD), and included residents in Los Altos Hills neighborhoods adjacent to
the traffic improvements proposed for Arastradero Road. Based on inquiries
from Los Altos Hills’ residents in December 2004, Los Altos Hills interim City
Engineer David Ross emailed Palo Alto Public Works Director Glenn Roberts.
Based on that contact, Palo Alto Transportation Projects Manager Gayle
Likens sent a detailed email on January 5, 2005 to David Ross identifying
traffic mitigations along Arastradero Road including two proposed signals on
Arastradero Road at Deer Creek Road and Fremont Road at Hillview Avenue.
Staff confirmed at the Los Altos Hills Town Council meeting of last week that
they shared Palo Alto’s view that traffic signaling was considered a “good
thing” to promote traffic safety. Los Altos Hills, as well as neighboring cities
including Mountain View, Menlo Park, Portola Valley, and Woodside, received
notices of preparation for the Draft EIR at the end of 2004. Palo Alto also
sent Los Altos Hills a Draft EIR in January 2005. On May 18, 2005, Palo Alto
Director of Planning and Community Environment Steve Emslie met with
planning and engineering staff from Los Altos Hills to further review their
concerns. At the Los Altos Hills Town Council meeting on May 19, 2005, Mr.
Emslie presented and discussed the letter signed by City Manager Frank
Benest which documented certain commitments by the City of Palo Alto to
the Town of Los Altos Hills clarifying Palo Alto’s intent and two points of
misinformation: 1) as stipulated in the EIR, Palo Alto would not widen Arastradero Road; and 2) the Mayfield Agreement did not increase
commercial square footage over what was allowed and anticipated in the
City’s Comprehensive Plan (Comp Plan). In addition, Palo Alto committed
itself to monitor traffic in the field and only move forward with traffic signals
when thresholds were met as required in the EIR. When signals were
required, Palo Alto would consult with the Town of Los Altos Hills with
respect to the designs of the signals, which would be rural profile signals.
Staff recommended the Council conclude the matter that evening by
approving the second reading of the Ordinance approving a Development
Agreement.
Senior Assistant City Attorney Wynne Furth said the two items on Council’s
agenda that evening were: 1) the second reading of the ordinance that
adopted the proposed negotiated Development Agreement with Stanford;
and 2) the amendment to the zoning code in order to implement the
Development Agreement. Ordinances were required to be heard by the
Council at two separate meetings. At the meeting of May 2, 2005, a public
hearing was held on the project and its environmental documentation. The
public hearing was then closed, and the Council adopted a resolution that
certified the EIR was adequate, adopted a mitigation and monitoring
05/24/05 99-139
program, and adopted a statement of overriding considerations for the one
impact where no mitigation measure could be found, which was construction
noise. The Council had to decide that evening whether or not to reopen the
public hearing. Reopening the public hearing would require setting a new
date for the matter to be heard. Among the points raised was the concern
about the adequacy of the notice that was given. Under the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), no individual mailing was required. Palo
Alto publicized environmental review through advertisements. However, for
zone changes and Development Agreements, individual mailings were done.
Under California State law, once the number of addresses involved reached
more than 1,000 mailings, individual mailings were no longer required;
instead, published notices were required. In this case, between 2,100 and
2,800 individual mailings were sent out. The basic legal requirement was
met by the repeated ads in the Palo Alto Weekly, which was mailed to
PAUSD residents including other individuals in Los Altos Hills in the vicinity of
the Stanford Research Park. She was confident those notices were adequate.
Mike Cobb reminded the Council of the legacy that could be created by
voting in favor of the project.
James McCroskey, 4158 Oak Hill Avenue, said his street abutted Arastradero
Road near Foothill Expressway, and he was keenly aware of the traffic
situation at that intersection. Sometimes signals helped, but he did not see
how the two proposed signal lights would significantly improve traffic on
Arastradero Road. He urged the Council to restrict signal lights and road widening in the project.
Mike O’Malley, Mayor Town of Los Altos Hills, 27781 Edgerton Road, Los
Altos Hills, said he did not want to see Arastradero Road become a four-lane
road or have traffic lights installed. If that did happen, it would be another
Page Mill Road through the middle of Los Altos Hills.
Kim Cranston, 27080 Fremont Road, Los Altos Hills, said Council Member
Kishimoto was correct when she stated at the hearing of May 2, 2005, that
the Hillview Avenue neighbors cared about maintaining the rural character of
Arastradero Road.
Jim Mongillo, 13610 Roble Alto Court, Los Altos Hills, said it seemed
unnecessary to have a major thoroughfare so close to Page Mill Road that
already served that purpose.
Dot Shreiner, 14301 Saddle Mountain Drive, Los Altos Hills, said she lived in
the PAUSD and did not receive the Palo Alto Weekly. She said noticing was
vague and did not address the traffic route between Highway 280 and
Hillview Avenue.
05/24/05 99-140
Sandy Humphries, 26238 W. Fremont Road, Los Altos Hills, said she noticed
new buildings being built along the roadway, but nearly half of them were
empty. She questioned why Roche Bioscience needed to increase its building
size by 100,000 square feet when there were already available buildings.
Jean (John) Mordo, Vogue Court, Los Altos Hills, said City Manager Frank
Benest pointed out traffic would be monitored and once traffic increased,
signal lights would be recommended. He felt once the signal lights were
installed the traffic would increase.
Vince Liu, 27241 Fremont Road, Los Altos Hills, expressed opposition to
traffic signals on Arastradero Road.
Charles E. Smith, 14410 Debell Road, Los Altos Hills, urged the Council to
reconsider placing signal lights at Fremont and Deer Creek roads, and
Hillview Avenue because of the negative impact it would have on bicyclists,
pedestrians and equestrians.
Sandra Lonnquist, CEO Palo Alto Chamber of Commerce (Chamber), 122
Hamilton Avenue, said the Chamber had been in support of the project since
its inception. She believed a traffic signal was required by project growth
and traffic in general, not simply due to the Mayfield project.
Jennifer Couperis, 275 Hawthorne Avenue, #215, said she would like to see
less of every person being for themselves and more of being responsible to each other and for each other.
Ed Schmitt, 2344 Columbia Street, said the asserted declaration that
conversion from commercial buildings to residential housing on the Upper
California Avenue site would reduce traffic in College Terrace was wrong.
Jitze Couperis, 13680 Page Mill Road, Los Altos Hills, said Arastradero Road
from the City’s perspective allowed ingress and egress from Hanover Street;
however, Arastradero Road from Los Altos Hills led into the town. The traffic
traveling Highway 280 towards the Stanford Research Park theoretically
should take Page Mill Road. A lot of them, however, used Arastradero Road.
He challenged the Council to improve the level of service on Page Mill Road.
Nancy Couperis, 13680 Page Mill Road, Los Altos Hills, asked the Council to
allow Arastradero Road to keep the stop signs.
Sue Sullivan, 13977 Campo Vista Lane, Los Altos Hills, said change was
inevitable and could serve the greater good; however, change could be
achieved while still maintaining positive and worthwhile traditions.
05/24/05 99-141
Joe Seiger, 27087 Old Trace Lane, Los Altos Hills, said Palo Alto had a
unique opportunity when, and if, Roche Bioscience was rebuilt. Some of the
traffic could be directed back to Coyote Creek Road and onto Page Mill Road.
John K. Abraham, 736 Ellsworth Place, said the Draft EIR was, at best, a
well-organized document; however, the content did not contain enough
details to address the issues.
Martha Bowden, 27833 Saddle Court, Los Altos Hills, said the traffic study
did not mention that bicyclists heavily used Arastradero Road. It was the
only route in Los Altos Hills for approximately 250 kids to get to Terman
Elementary and Gunn High Schools. Her main concern was safety.
Irene Sampson, Palo Alto League of Women’s Voters, reaffirmed the
League’s support for the soccer playing fields and affordable housing.
Sally Probst, 735 Coastland Drive, said the Mayfield development project
was a good agreement. She urged the Council to take action that evening.
Betsy Allyn, Willmar Drive, reaffirmed her concern about the project’s effects
on the Charleston/Arastradero Corridor.
Douglas Kreitz, 1043 Cowper Street, urged the Council not to delay taking
action on the Mayfield Agreement.
Amanda Vicharelli, 2125 Bowdoin Street, urged the Council to review the
traffic analysis before making a decision on the EIR.
Jay Oliff, 4110 Old Trace Road, expressed opposition to any effects of the
Mayfield Agreement that would widen Arastradero Road or take away the
road’s rural ambiance.
Fred Balin, 2385 Columbia Street, recommended the Council proceed no
further with the EIR, but instead reconsider the previously approved
certification. The traffic analysis as it applied to College Terrace was
inadequate, the assumptions invalid, and the conclusions unreasonable.
Norman Carroll, 425 High Street, #120, said notice of the proposed project
was published in the Palo Alto Weekly in December 2004. The published ad
read, “The Mayfield Development could occur anywhere in the Stanford
Research Park, and traffic signals would be installed at Arastradero Road and
Hillview Avenue, and Deer Creek and Arastradero Roads. The agreement
would be reviewed at two Planning and Transportation Commission (P&TC)
meetings in January and February 2005, and voted on by the Council in
March 2005.”
05/24/05 99-142
Colette Cranston, 27080 Fremont Road, Los Altos Hills, said as elected
officials, the City Council was charged with listening to its neighbors and
dealing with impacts.
Craig Laughton, 2321 Harvard Street, reaffirmed his belief that the proposed
development would incur major traffic impacts. He expressed support for the
project.
John Mark Agasta, 1648 California Avenue, said a large number of people
favored the core elements of the Development Agreement, and preferred it
to the current status quo. He would welcome the new College Terrace
residents and expressed support for the project.
Kathy Durham, 2039 Dartmouth Street, believed there were three questions
the Council needed to ask themselves: 1) were there valid grounds to re-
circulate and reopen the hearing for the EIR; 2) did any of the issues raised
about the two intersections on Arastradero Road merit reopening the public
hearing on the ordinances; and 3) how should the Council make decisions
about traffic management and safety? She recommended the Council move
forward that evening.
RECESS: 7:45 p.m. to 7:50 p.m.
Council Member Kishimoto asked staff to address the issue of the TIRE index
and whether the Council had approved its use.
Director of Planning and Community Environment Steve Emslie said the City
did not have thresholds formally adopted by the City Council. The TIRE index
was a mathematical fraction of the increase in traffic on residential streets
only, and was broken into three fractions: 0.1, 0.2 and 0.3, and the different
levels were based on research conducted by Professor Don Appleyard from
the University of California. He measured the change in activities related to
residential usage of property during various changes in traffic volumes. The
lowest threshold of 0.1 was a fractional change of any perceptible difference
in traffic activity. Between 0.2 and 0.3 was the beginning of change in traffic
activity, but no perception. Between 0.1 and 0.2 was a perception of change,
but no perceived diminution in the quality of life or change in activities. It
was at the 0.3 level where the environment became classified as traffic
dominant and changes in activity occurred. Staff had used the 0.1 and 0.2
index in previous documents and thought anything below 0.3 was generally
accepted as a conservative standard.
Ms. Furth said the Council did approve the use of the 0.2 threshold most
recently on May 2, 2005, but also approved the use of the same threshold in
other EIR’s reviewed in the past seven years.
05/24/05 99-143
Council Member Kishimoto said she was a member of the Stanford Liaison
Committee (SLC) when the project first began. She had a daughter who
played softball and soccer, and although there were a number of good things
about the Development Agreement, she stood by her previous vote against
its approval. She believed additional outreach was needed for neighbors of
the Hillview Avenue site, as well as the Peter Coutts neighborhood. She
urged her colleagues to retain site and design review of both the housing
and office sites. Another issue was the lack of the minimum private open
space for multi-family housing. She also objected to the adoption of the use
of 0.2 tire index, and the signalization of the two Arastradero Road
intersections. She suggested reopening the hearing on the EIR.
Mayor Burch read into the record the title of the ordinances.
MOTION: Council Member Kishimoto moved to reopen the hearing on the
Environmental Impact Report
MOTION FAILED FOR LACK OF SECOND
Council Member Morton clarified the Council was not there to modify the
conditions of the EIR or the Development Agreement, but rather to approve
or not approve the second reading of the ordinances. He believed steps had
been taken to address the concerns of the immediate neighbors in College
Terrace, although there was an element in College Terrace, who was not
happy with the final agreement. At the same time, he was aware of the fact that some people felt information came late, if at all.
MOTION: Council Member Morton moved, seconded by Ojakian, to adopt
the Ordinances.
Ordinance 4870 entitled “Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo
Alto Approving a Development Agreement Between the Board of
Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University and the City of Palo
Alto, Including the Mayfield Lease for the Stanford/Palo Alto
Community Playing Fields” (1st Reading 05/02/2005, Passed 5-1, Kishimoto no, Cordell,
Freeman, Mossar not participating)
Ordinance 4871 entitled “Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo
Alto Amending Title 18 (Zoning) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code by
Amending Sections 18.60.050 and 18.63.040 as they Regulate Floor
Area Ratios and Site Coverage in the LM, LM-3 and LM-5 Districts and
Adding Chapter 18.62 (Alternative Development Standards), and
Amending the Zoning Map of the City of Palo Alto to Make 9 Parcels
(2450, 2470, 2500, 2650, 2700 and 2780 El Camino Real and 505,
1451, 1501 and 1601 California Avenue) Eligible to use Alternative
Development Standards in Order to Implement the Development
05/24/05 99-144
Agreement Between the City and Stanford University Dated May __,
2005” (1st Reading 05/02/2005, Passed 5-1, Kishimoto no, Cordell, Freeman, Mossar not participating)
Council Member Morton said the impact of the decision on Los Altos Hills was
a signal light; however, the impact of saying no to the Palo Alto community
was to deny playing fields, which the City had been struggling to find. He did
not believe the Council would turn a deaf ear to the neighboring residents if,
and when, the level of traffic warranted a signal light.
Council Member Ojakian asked what would trigger the installation of signal
lights on Arastradero Road, and was there a time in the past when those signal lights could have been installed.
Mr. Emslie said the EIR indicated, based on the 2003 count, warrants for
traffic signals were present for the Fremont/Hillview/Arastradero
intersection, but were not present for the Deer Creek/Arastradero
intersection.
Council Member Ojakian asked whether it was the Mayfield project that
triggered the installation of traffic signals, or was it more than just the
proposed development.
Mr. Emslie said the EIR concluded even without the Mayfield project traffic
would continue to increase. If nothing else were built in the Stanford
Research Park, regional traffic growth would create the necessary warrants
for signalization at both intersections.
Council Member Ojakian said by certifying the EIR, which the Council had
already done and even if the Mayfield project did not go forward, future
development could trigger the traffic signalization.
Mr. Emslie said the background increase in traffic in the region would create
over time the need for signals at the two intersections.
Council Member Ojakian said someone made the comment about widening Arastradero Road. He asked where in the documentation was the suggestion
to do that.
Mr. Benest said nowhere in the document was there a suggestion to widen
Arastradero Road.
Council Member Ojakian said he understood the signal lights would partially
avoid adding turn lanes and extra roads.
Mr. Emslie said the signal lights gave the additional capacity to prevent the
widening of Arastradero Road.
05/24/05 99-145
Council Member Ojakian asked whether the tire index was a CEQA
requirement.
Mr. Emslie said the TIRE index was used as a benchmark to measure traffic
intrusion on low volume streets only. The Level of Service analysis did not
correlate to low volume streets. Therefore, the TIRE index was used to
measure the incremental change in traffic to determine if there was a
degradation of the residential environment.
Council Member Ojakian asked whether it was a requirement.
Mr. Emslie said it was not a requirement by State standards.
Council Member Ojakian said there would be a Capital Improvement Project
(SIP) coming to the Council in June 2005 that dealt with the
Arastradero/Charleston corridor and included an incremental amount of
money. The volume of traffic triggered the signal light at the
Charleston/Arastradero Corridor. Anything done to help minimize that
through the City’s CIP’s would be beneficial. The Mayfield project was more
than a soccer agreement. It was a complex deal initiated by the City that not
only provided for shortages in soccer playing fields but shortages in housing
in Palo Alto. He reaffirmed his support for the project.
Vice Mayor Kleinberg said one request raised was for the Council to amend
the ordinance that evening and then vote on it. She asked for clarification on whether that was a legal option.
Mr. Furth said if the Council amended the ordinance, it would then be placed
on first reading again. The ordinance adopted an agreement negotiated with
Stanford University, which they signed after the first reading. If the Council
wished to modify the agreement, staff would need to re-negotiate with
Stanford. If the Council wished to reopen the hearing and consider new
evidence, staff recommended a directive to set another public hearing.
Vice Mayor Kleinberg said the project presented a number of benefits for the
community. What made the project a tough one was the traffic lights on
Arastradero Road. She did not agree the signal lights would bring traffic to
that area and make it less safe. There were two possible options the Council
could take that evening: 1) amend the ordinance; or 2) rescind the EIR and
the ordinances and restart the hearing process. When weighed against the
outcome in terms of the timing of the playing fields and affordable housing,
she did not feel it was in the best interest of the most in the community. The
solution was for everyone to work together for Palo Alto, Stanford and Los
Altos Hills to reduce vehicular traffic in the area, and redirect the rest of it
away from Arastradero Road. She believed signal lights should be the last
05/24/05 99-146
resort. She expressed support for the project with some reluctance, but
optimism about the outcome.
Council Member Beecham said he did not believe the overall impact of
100,000 square feet, which was 1 percent of the square footage in the
Stanford Research Park, would have a significant impact other than a
localized intersection or so. He understood whether or not the Mayfield
project moved forward there would be increased traffic on Arastradero Road
that required a signal light at some point. In his recent discussion with
Mayor Burch, there was the suggestion to set up an ad hoc committee to
include council members from Palo Alto and Los Altos Hills to ensure better
communication as the project moved forward. It would not necessarily
change the future, but would change how it was done. He supported the
motion.
Council Member Kishimoto clarified there was a difference between present
day traffic, the Year 2010 with no project, and the Year 2010 with Phase
One and Two. Although there was a slight increase in present day outside
traffic, a more significant increase was noted between the Year 2010 with no
project and the Year 2010 with Phase One and Two. The City’s Comp Plan
indicated an agreement not to do overriding considerations at certain
intersections. By accepting the EIR, the City was obligated to install traffic
signals once traffic reached a certain level.
Mayor Burch said the issue was not one of playing fields versus traffic lights. If and when any signalized traffic lights were installed, they could be
programmed in ways that were not possible a few years prior. He expressed
gratitude to his colleagues for the way they responded to the task, took it
seriously, and considered all aspects. He reaffirmed his support for the
project.
MOTION PASSED 5-1, Kishimoto no, Cordell, Freeman, Mossar not
participating.
MOTION: Council Member Morton moved, seconded by Ojakian, that before
any permanent or significant changes are made to traffic lights at Hillview
and Arastradero that community input be sought and that staff explore the
possibility of adding that section of Arastradero to the Arastradero Study.
MOTION PASSED 6-0, Cordell, Freeman, Mossar not participating.
Council Member Morton asked whether it was easier to get funds from
Metropolitan Transportation Commission with two jurisdictions. If so, it
would behoove the City to ask the Los Altos Hills City Council to assist in
finding funds for the additional study.
05/24/05 99-147
ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m.
ATTEST: APPROVED:
City Clerk Mayor
NOTE: Sense minutes (synopsis) are prepared in accordance with Palo Alto Municipal Code Sections 2.04.180(a) and (b). The City Council and Standing Committee meeting tapes are made solely for the purpose of facilitating the preparation of the minutes of the meetings. City Council and Standing Committee meeting tapes are recycled 90 days from the date of the meeting. The tapes are available for members of the public to listen to during regular office hours.
05/24/05 99-148